This was an unexpected development and we are now working toward resolving both the issue of Mitten's 10k voters and figuring out the process for CSM 7 Chair.

You mean 10k character votes right? Because the way I understand this works, that each account has 3 character slots, so technically 1 person, can vote 3 times. So in reality, 10k individual people are not disenfranchised.

Also, didn't the votes take place prior to said actions taken by Mittens? I am curious to know how many votes he would have lost had he done this prior to the conclusion of the CSM7 vote. I think this should be taken into account as well.

A person in all aspects of life should be held accountable for their action's and inaction's. There is no difference in this situation, than if someone did this to someone they go to school with or work with. The person known as The Mittani is no different than you or I. Therefore, Mittens shouldn't be given special treatment for breaking the rules and inciting such terrible things. He had a choice in his words. He is an educated man, a smart man who prides on his abilities to communicate. There is a lesson in this for him, and I am sure he will grow and become a stronger leader because of it. Whether you like his game play or not doesn't matter. This is a human matter, not a gaming matter, and although it is a fine line, human matters are more important, and should be respected. I believe this is what CCP is doing. This is what I believe Mittens is doing in making reparations and stepping down. There is always next year, and he has plenty of time to plan and strategise his next campaign. I wish him luck.

This was an unexpected development and we are now working toward resolving both the issue of Mitten's 10k voters and figuring out the process for CSM 7 Chair.

You mean 10k character votes right? Because the way I understand this works, that each account has 3 character slots, so technically 1 person, can vote 3 times. So in reality, 10k individual people are not disenfranchised.

Posted - 2012.03.29 16:24:00 -
[994] - Quote
CCP did not disenfranchise anyone. The Mittani disenfranchised himself ,and to an extent all who voted for him, with his ill-advised comments and behavior in a very public forum.

Like I said before, do not blame CCP, blame the Mittani. No one asked him to act the fool, it simply came natural to him and he paid the price. One might consider his conduct and apparent lack of maturity before voting for him again, assuming he is even allowed to run.

Yeah it was made partially in response to the developer corruption scandal that involved T20 and Band of Brothers alliance and make sure the players had oversight to ensure that could never happen again.

The irony is we almost had a situation where Mittani was boasting of being in control of developers and influence within CCP and replaying this corrupt old scenario again. Had Mittani not been appropriately punished over his behaviour at Fanfest many many players and many external media sites would have considered he was being given unfair treatment that other players could not expect.

I'm so happy you see the world with such nice conspiracy eyes. Ever played with the possibility that Mittens was trolling when he was saying he controlled the devs?

Yeah it was made partially in response to the developer corruption scandal that involved T20 and Band of Brothers alliance and make sure the players had oversight to ensure that could never happen again.

The irony is we almost had a situation where Mittani was boasting of being in control of developers and influence within CCP and replaying this corrupt old scenario again. Had Mittani not been appropriately punished over his behaviour at Fanfest many many players and many external media sites would have considered he was being given unfair treatment that other players could not expect.

I'm so happy you see the world with such nice conspiracy eyes. Ever played with the possibility that Mittens was trolling when he was saying he controlled the devs?

I think you should quit eve and go outside.

Somebody serving on a body that was setup to contront the stink of developer corruption in an online game should know better than to troll about corruption between him and his ex-goonswarm buddies in said online game development.

While I don't think you should quit the game I do think you should probably unplug your keyboard.

Posted - 2012.03.29 16:34:00 -
[998] - Quote
In a month no one will remember Mittani and Burn Jita will be a flop

This is a huge setback politically for the Goons, as they are one of the largest blocks and won't be represented

It is hilarious to see all of these Goonies on the forum crying like babies. Maybe they need to HTFU. The amount of whining and equivocation is thick enough to cut with a knife

Your leader is dumped. We don't care what you think. What are you going to do about it

I am guessing nothing because you guys are actually really soft when someone else bullies you.Start a corp and do it yourself. You'll fail, but you'll enjoy failing. Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.

The panelist was a member of the CSM who has subsequently resigned from CSM6 and, as a result, will resign his seat on CSM7.

You can tell it was PR/marketing management who made the call to give him the boot from the really weird, vague language used to describe his kicking.

And rightly so, the Mittani has been a Marketing/PR disaster with this latest debacle. Frankly, I would not follow this guy to the grocery store for a loaf of bread if he is no smarter than this. Maybe you should not either.

[You mean 10k character votes right? Because the way I understand this works, that each account has 3 character slots, so technically 1 person, can vote 3 times. So in reality, 10k individual people are not disenfranchised.

You understand wrong. You can only vote once per account. Of course many people have multiple accounts, so that 10k number is probably representative of fewer than 10k individual people.

Posted - 2012.03.29 16:39:00 -
[1003] - Quote
Mittens and Goons tried to make the new thing in eve "We love you". You know, spread the love and make eve a better place, but you butthurt pubbies had to turn it around to something awful like "Go kill yourself".

Posted - 2012.03.29 16:41:00 -
[1005] - Quote
Hi folks. We've noticed a few common questions popping up in this thread that we'd like to answer.

Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman.A1, As a part of the CSM bylaws, banned players are ineligible to sit on the CSM. This would have been an unfortunate side effect of CCP feeling that a temporary ban was the correct course of action in this case.However, prior to any notification to this effect, The chairman of CSM6 resigned of his own volition as he had previously announced that he would do. Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

We have had members resign from the CSM before. The process is pretty clear in these cases, the next person on the voting poll becomes active. This is the first time the chairman of the CSM has resigned so we are discussing with the CSM if we should make amendments to the process based on that.

Q2, There is an issue of 10,058 votes. What will CCP do about that?A2, As in most democratic societies, if an elected member resigns the governance system is designed to handle that; for CSM6 the "next" person steps in (an alternate); for CSM7, where we had removed the concept of GGalternateGGV and increased the size of the CSM to 14, the council simply continues to function minus one. If players are not satisfied with that system they should contact the CSM and propose changes for CSM 7 to discuss formally. The CSM can bring this issue up directly with CCP and propose changes should such an event happen in the future.It is clear from many communications from CSM6 and CSM7-elect members that they take the representation of these 10,058 voters very seriously and hopefully the remaining CSM representatives will act in the spirit of those who voted for the resigned member.

We should also keep in mind that every CSM member has the obligation to, at some level, represent all of EVE and its players, and that the voting system is anonymous.

Q3, Real life actions should not equate to in game sanctions. Why did this happen?A3, After much deliberation on the subject, CCP considers the Alliance Panel to be an official CCP forum, as it is hosted by CCP and broadcast in a similarly visible fashion to the EVE Online forums. As such, it falls under the jurisdiction of the TOS. Furthermore, the panelist, present on the panel in order to represent his in-game identity, advocated using in-game actions to achieve a real world outcome. Specifically he suggested that if anyone wanted to make another player kill themselves in real life, they should go in game and harass them to achieve that consequence. The totality of the situation including the official forum in which it was held and statements of the panelist during the Q&A, have since lead to in-game sanctions. However, it is important to note that this incidence does not necessarily create precedence for any other "real life" actions or statements triggering a ban.

Q4, Wait, so you DID vet the presentations? Meaning it was perfectly fine for him to make fun of a suicidal player?A4, Although the contents of the Alliance Panel presentations and discussion topics are reviewed by CCP prior to the event itself, the TOS-breaking incident took place during an unscripted Q&A session after the main presentation which was not mentioned in the submitted presentation. The submitted presentation slides (although distasteful) did not give the name of the player at any time, nor did they call for direct action against that player, and therefore passed muster. CCP have always allowed substantial leeway during the Alliance Panel and we look forward to ensuring that future events remain entertaining and engaging for the EVE community.CCP Xhagen | CSM Project Manager

Posted - 2012.03.29 16:42:00 -
[1006] - Quote
Anyone have any words from the victim? You know the guy on the verge of suicide who contacts the leader of an alliance who's source of entertainment is to ruin YOUR game. The fact he is contacting Mittani with such personal information in the first place is odd, odd enough that I would have taken it as some dude trolling.

If the guy wasn't being harassed before he certainly is now with CCP's decision.

It is clear from many communications from CSM6 and CSM7-elect members that they take the representation of these 10,058 voters very seriously and hopefully the remaining CSM representatives will act in the spirit of those who voted for the resigned member.

Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

That is a very poor decision that CCP in general should probably reconsider over the year to come. An individual's noteriety/prominence should never overcome the basic requirement to be a player of good standing and reputation (ie without serious infractions on the account.)

The way you've stated it there just sounds like a shady legal loophole and it will be seen as such.

Hi folks. We've noticed a few common questions popping up in this thread that we'd like to answer.

Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman.A1, As a part of the CSM bylaws, banned players are ineligible to sit on the CSM. This would have been an unfortunate side effect of CCP feeling that a temporary ban was the correct course of action in this case.However, prior to any notification to this effect, The chairman of CSM6 resigned of his own volition as he had previously announced that he would do. Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

We have had members resign from the CSM before. The process is pretty clear in these cases, the next person on the voting poll becomes active. This is the first time the chairman of the CSM has resigned so we are discussing with the CSM if we should make amendments to the process based on that.

Q2, There is an issue of 10,058 votes. What will CCP do about that?A2, As in most democratic societies, if an elected member resigns the governance system is designed to handle that; for CSM6 the "next" person steps in (an alternate); for CSM7, where we had removed the concept of GGalternateGGV and increased the size of the CSM to 14, the council simply continues to function minus one. If players are not satisfied with that system they should contact the CSM and propose changes for CSM 7 to discuss formally. The CSM can bring this issue up directly with CCP and propose changes should such an event happen in the future.It is clear from many communications from CSM6 and CSM7-elect members that they take the representation of these 10,058 voters very seriously and hopefully the remaining CSM representatives will act in the spirit of those who voted for the resigned member.

We should also keep in mind that every CSM member has the obligation to, at some level, represent all of EVE and its players, and that the voting system is anonymous.

Q3, Real life actions should not equate to in game sanctions. Why did this happen?A3, After much deliberation on the subject, CCP considers the Alliance Panel to be an official CCP forum, as it is hosted by CCP and broadcast in a similarly visible fashion to the EVE Online forums. As such, it falls under the jurisdiction of the TOS. Furthermore, the panelist, present on the panel in order to represent his in-game identity, advocated using in-game actions to achieve a real world outcome. Specifically he suggested that if anyone wanted to make another player kill themselves in real life, they should go in game and harass them to achieve that consequence. The totality of the situation including the official forum in which it was held and statements of the panelist during the Q&A, have since lead to in-game sanctions. However, it is important to note that this incidence does not necessarily create precedence for any other "real life" actions or statements triggering a ban.

Q4, Wait, so you DID vet the presentations? Meaning it was perfectly fine for him to make fun of a suicidal player?A4, Although the contents of the Alliance Panel presentations and discussion topics are reviewed by CCP prior to the event itself, the TOS-breaking incident took place during an unscripted Q&A session after the main presentation which was not mentioned in the submitted presentation. The submitted presentation slides (although distasteful) did not give the name of the player at any time, nor did they call for direct action against that player, and therefore passed muster. CCP have always allowed substantial leeway during the Alliance Panel and we look forward to ensuring that future events remain entertaining and engaging for the EVE community.

Like a BOSS!!....GG#God grant me the serenity to accept the things I canGGVt shoot, the courage to shoot the things I can, and the wisdom to GTFO!!GG%GGt Snot Shot - 2012.....Yeah I'm a killin machine..... http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=50753

Hi folks. We've noticed a few common questions popping up in this thread that we'd like to answer.

Q1, CCP forced the resignation of the CSM Chairman.A1, As a part of the CSM bylaws, banned players are ineligible to sit on the CSM. This would have been an unfortunate side effect of CCP feeling that a temporary ban was the correct course of action in this case.However, prior to any notification to this effect, The chairman of CSM6 resigned of his own volition as he had previously announced that he would do. Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

We have had members resign from the CSM before. The process is pretty clear in these cases, the next person on the voting poll becomes active. This is the first time the chairman of the CSM has resigned so we are discussing with the CSM if we should make amendments to the process based on that.

I can tell you're in marketing because of the way you're weaseling around to make it look like mittens resigned from CSM 7 instead of you removing him.

Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

That is a very poor decision that CCP in general should probably reconsider over the year to come. An individual's noteriety/prominence should never overcome the basic requirement to be a player of good standing and reputation (ie without serious infractions on the account.)

The way you've stated it there just sounds like a shady legal loophole and it will be seen as such.

Bottom of the pile roleplayer tries to manipulate a barely controversial dramabomb to suit his horrible larping political agenda, news at 11

Posted - 2012.03.29 16:57:00 -
[1017] - Quote
I want to make it clear noone actually cares about the "victim" here except for the person who personally apologized and gave them ISK (Mittani).

Also, the "victim's" former in game bio gave a link to a RL blog which made it easy to track this person down to his RL identity for anyone that cared. Thankfully, that person has removed that link at this time.

I think CCP's actions here are a bit incredulous and based on suppositions.

The persons letter does not say he wants to kill himself, it states that he wishes he would die, and that he had done so often in this game.

You have killed that panel's potential. No matter how much you want to say "it's ok", every Alliance leader now has to walk up on that stage with the weight of being banned from EVE because of a drunken mishap done in person on a private broadcast.

Since the chair resigned from CSM 6 prior to being banned and was not yet seated on CSM 7 he will be able to run for future CSMs.

That is a very poor decision that CCP in general should probably reconsider over the year to come. An individual's noteriety/prominence should never overcome the basic requirement to be a player of good standing and reputation (ie without serious infractions on the account.)

The way you've stated it there just sounds like a shady legal loophole and it will be seen as such.

Bottom of the pile roleplayer tries to manipulate a barely controversial dramabomb to suit his horrible larping political agenda, news at 11

I like the way you come out with a personal attack rather than trying to debate the point. It does make rather easy to hold your comment up for ridicule. The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom. Jericho Fraction is Recruiting!

COPYRIGHT NOTICEEVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.